Justice reinvestment in Oklahoma : overview

Justice Reinvestment
in Oklahoma
Overview
Oklahoma’s incarceration rate is
among the highest in the nation
and spending on corrections has
increased 41 percent over the past
decade, yet crime rates have fallen
less than most other states. This sug-gests
that additional public safety
benefits are not being generated
despite Oklahoma’s increased investment in corrections. To
address this challenge, the Oklahoma legislature recently enacted
House Bill 2131, a bill designed to make the criminal justice sys-tem
more efficient and cost-effective. The combined elements of
the bill are anticipated to save money; however, a comprehen-sive
analysis of the criminal justice system is needed to deter-mine
the full impact of the legislation and what will happen to
the prison population and costs to taxpayers with the new law in
place. Furthermore, policymakers are interested in conducting
an extensive evaluation to identify additional policies for holding
offenders accountable in a way that uses tax dollars efficiently
and, most importantly, improves public safety.
To address these issues, Governor Mary Fallin, Speaker of the
House Kris Steele, Senate President Pro Tempore Brian Bing-man
and Supreme Court Justice James Edmondson expressed
interest in employing a justice reinvestment strategy, which is a
data-driven approach to reduce corrections spending and reinvest
a portion of the savings generated in strategies that will increase
public safety. To this end, Oklahoma sought assistance from the
Bureau of Justice Assistance, a division of the U.S. Department
of Justice, and the Pew Center on the States. The state leaders
agreed to establish a bipartisan, interbranch working group com-prised
of leading state officials which would receive intensive
technical assistance from the Council of State Governments Jus-tice
Center in partnership with the Pew Center on the States. The
CSG Justice Center will assist the working group in analyzing
data and developing a comprehensive set of policy options.
June 2011
Working Group
Speaker Kris Steele, Co-Chair
Oklahoma House of Representatives
Don Millican, Co-Chair
Chairman, Oklahoma Christian University
Board of Trustees
Senator Patrick Anderson
Oklahoma Senate
Trent Baggett
Assistant Executive Coordinator,
Oklahoma District Attorneys Council
Currie Ballard
Member, Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board
Representative Lisa Billy
Oklahoma House of Representatives
Allyson Carson
Victim Services Coordinator,
Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office
Secretary Terry Cline
Oklahoma Department of Health
Rebecca Frazier
Assistant General Counsel,
Oklahoma Office of the Governor
Director Howard Hendrick
Oklahoma Department of Human Services
Representative Scott Inman
Oklahoma House of Representatives
The Honorable Arlene Johnson
Presiding Judge, Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals
Director Justin Jones
Oklahoma Department of Corrections
Melissa McLawhorn Houston
Policy Director and Assistant Attorney General,
Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office
Ken McNair
Executive Director,
Oklahoma Sheriffs’ Association
Senator Jonathan Nichols
Oklahoma Senate
Senator Andrew Rice
Oklahoma Senate
Amy Santee
Senior Program Officer,
George Kaiser Family Foundation
Commissioner Terri White
Oklahoma Department of Mental Health
and Substance Abuse Services
2 Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma
Oklahoma’s violent crime rate is high; it has not decreased since 2000.
• In 2009, Oklahoma had the eleventh highest rate of violent crime in the U.S., with 501 reported crimes per
100,000 residents.1
• While Oklahoma’s violent crime rate increased slightly, by almost one percent, between 2000 and 2009, violent
crime rates nationally declined 15 percent; 36 states experienced a drop in their violent crime rates during this
time period.2
• Between 2000 and 2009, the property crime rate dropped 12 percent in Oklahoma, from 4,0613 to 3,5744 reported
crimes per 100,000 residents. Despite this decline, Oklahoma’s property crime rate remains above the national
average; it is the thirteenth highest in the nation.5
Oklahoma’s incarceration rate is one of the highest in the nation, particularly for women.
• Oklahoma’s incarceration rate remained relatively unchanged from 2000 to 2009. In 2009, the state���s incarcera-tion
rate—657 people incarcerated per 100,000 residents—was the third highest in the U.S.6
• In 2009, Oklahoma incarcerated 132 women per 100,000, which is nearly double the national average of 68 per
100,000. This incarceration rate for women is the highest among the 50 states and 43 percent higher than Texas,
which ranked number two at 92 women per 100,000 incarcerated.7
• Oklahoma incarcerated 2,760 females during FY 2010, an increase of 21 percent over the 2,289 females incar-cerated
in FY 2000.8
The state prison population increased significantly, along with state spending on
corrections, between FY 2000 and FY 2010.
• From FY 2000 to FY 2010, the state’s prison population grew 15 percent, from 22,621 to 25,935. If the people
sentenced to state prison but held in local jails are included in that calculation, the population increased 17
percent, from 23,258 to 27,283.9
• During the same period, the annual appropriation for the Oklahoma Department of Corrections increased 41
percent, from $356 million in FY 2000 to $503 million in FY 2010.10
• Utilization of jail bed backups increased 41 percent from 637 to 1,348 beds.11
Oklahoma policymakers do not currently receive a data-driven projection that forecasts the
growth of the state’s prison population.
• Prison population projections are based on trends in prison admissions, releases, and lengths of prison stay, in
addition to trends in other parts of the criminal justice system. In 2007, two-thirds of states used an advanced sim-ulation
projection methodology for this purpose.12 Currently, however, Oklahoma has no official state projection
to forecast future growth in the prison population or to estimate the impact of recent corrections policy changes.
• Assuming that the prison population continues to grow, policymakers currently do not have information to
guide decisions about how much to appropriate for additional prison space.
A majority of people released each year from prison are not supervised.
• After release from prison, a person can be released to probation (due to a split sentence), parole or without any
supervision because they have finished serving their sentence.
• Of those released from prison in FY 2010, 51 percent were released without any supervision, nine percent were
released to parole and 40 percent were released to probation.13
Criminal Justice Trends in Oklahoma
Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma 3
The Justice Reinvestment Approach
The CSG Justice Center will comprehensively analyze Oklahoma’s crime, arrest, conviction,
jail, prison, behavioral health and probation and parole supervision data. This analysis will
include a system-wide examination of the prison population, drivers of prison growth, and
strategies used currently by policymakers to increase public safety.
The CSG Justice Center will assist the Justice Reinvestment Working Group in review-ing
analyses and developing data-driven policy options that increase public safety and reduce
spending on corrections.
In collaboration with the Justice Reinvestment Working Group, which will review analysis
and share recommendations, the CSG Justice Center will develop data-driven policy options
that increase public safety and reduce spending on corrections.
step
1 Analyze data and
develop policy options
Once the policy options have been enacted, Oklahoma policymakers will need to verify that
the policies are adopted effectively. Policymakers may request continued assistance from the
Bureau of Justice Assistance to help translate the new policies into practice and ensure that
related programs and system investments achieve projected outcomes.
step
2 Adopt new policies and
put reinvestment strategies into place
Finally, the CSG Justice Center will ensure that Oklahoma officials receive brief, user-friendly,
and up-to-date information that explains the impact of enacted policies on jail and prison popu-lations,
and on rates of reincarceration and criminal activity. Typically, this includes a “dash-board”
of multiple indicators that make it easy for policymakers to track—in real time—the
changes in various components of the criminal justice system.
step
3 Measure Performance
4 Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma
To learn more about the justice reinvestment strategy
in Oklahoma and other states, please visit:
justicereinvestment.org
Points of view, recommendations, or findings stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
the official position or policies of The Pew Charitable Trusts, Council of State Governments Justice Center, or the Council of State
Governments’ members.
Suggested citation: Council of State Governments Justice Center, Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma: Overview (New York: Council of
State Governments Justice Center, 2011).
This project was supported by Grant No. 2010-
RRBX-K071 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the
Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the
Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of
Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Points
of view or opinions in this document are those of the
author and do not represent the official position or
policies of the United States Department of Justice.
To learn more about the Bureau of Justice Assistance,
please visit: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/.
Research and analysis described in this report has
been funded in part by the Public Safety Performance
Project of The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Center on the
States. Launched in 2006 as a project of the Pew Center
on the States, the Public Safety Performance Project
seeks to help states advance fiscally sound, data-driven
policies and practices in sentencing and corrections that
protect public safety, hold offenders accountable, and
control corrections costs.
To learn more about the Public Safety Performance
Project, please visit: http://www.pewpublicsafety.org/.
Bureau of Justice Assistance
U.S. Department of Justice
Council of State Governments Justice Center
justicecenter.csg.org
project contact:
Anne Bettesworth, Policy Analyst
206-420-2714 • abettesworth@csg.org
The Council of State Governments Justice Center is a national nonprofit organization that serves policymakers at the local, state,
and federal levels from all branches of government. The Justice Center provides practical, nonpartisan advice and consensus-driven
strategies, informed by available evidence, to increase public safety and strengthen communities.
1. United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(September 2010). Crime in the United States, 2009. Retrieved (May 1,
2011), from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/09cius.htm.
2. Ibid and United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation. (September 2001). Crime in the United States, 2000.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011), from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/
crime-in-the-u.s/2000/toc00.pdf.
3. United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation. (September 2001). Crime in the United States, 2000.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011), from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/
crime-in-the-u.s/2000/toc00.pdf.
4. United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation. (September 2010). Crime in the United States, 2009.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011), from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/09cius.htm.
5.Ibid.
6. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners
in State and Federal Institutions. (December 21, 2010). Prisoners in
2009. Retrieved (May 25, 2011), from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2232
7. US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2010).
Prisoners in 2009, Bulletin NCJ 231675. Retrieved (March 15, 2011)
from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2232.
8. Oklahoma Department of Corrections: Division of Female Offender
Operations. (2011). Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Report. Retrieved (June 7,
2011) from http://www.doc.state.ok.us/field/female/Fiscal%20Year%
202010%20Annual%20Report%20Final.pdf.
9. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, Evaluation and Analysis.
(2011). The State of Corrections in Oklahoma: Fiscal Year, 2010.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011) from http://www.doc.state.ok.us/
newsroom/annuals/2010/annualreport2010.pdf.
10. Oklahoma Department of Corrections. Legislative Budget Briefing,
January 2011.
11. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, Evaluation and Analysis.
(2011). The State of Corrections in Oklahoma: Fiscal Year, 2010.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011) from http://www.doc.state.ok.us/
newsroom/annuals/2010/annualreport2010.pdf.
12. Pew Center on the States, Public Safety Performance Project.
(Revised June 2007). Public Safety, Public Spending: Forecasting
America’s Prison Population 2007-2011. Retrieved (June 13, 2011)
from http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Public
%20Safety%20Public%20Spending.pdf.
13. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, Evaluation and Analysis.
(2011). The State of Corrections in Oklahoma: Fiscal Year, 2010.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011) from http://www.doc.state.ok.us/
newsroom/annuals/2010/annualreport2010.pdf.

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

Justice Reinvestment
in Oklahoma
Overview
Oklahoma’s incarceration rate is
among the highest in the nation
and spending on corrections has
increased 41 percent over the past
decade, yet crime rates have fallen
less than most other states. This sug-gests
that additional public safety
benefits are not being generated
despite Oklahoma’s increased investment in corrections. To
address this challenge, the Oklahoma legislature recently enacted
House Bill 2131, a bill designed to make the criminal justice sys-tem
more efficient and cost-effective. The combined elements of
the bill are anticipated to save money; however, a comprehen-sive
analysis of the criminal justice system is needed to deter-mine
the full impact of the legislation and what will happen to
the prison population and costs to taxpayers with the new law in
place. Furthermore, policymakers are interested in conducting
an extensive evaluation to identify additional policies for holding
offenders accountable in a way that uses tax dollars efficiently
and, most importantly, improves public safety.
To address these issues, Governor Mary Fallin, Speaker of the
House Kris Steele, Senate President Pro Tempore Brian Bing-man
and Supreme Court Justice James Edmondson expressed
interest in employing a justice reinvestment strategy, which is a
data-driven approach to reduce corrections spending and reinvest
a portion of the savings generated in strategies that will increase
public safety. To this end, Oklahoma sought assistance from the
Bureau of Justice Assistance, a division of the U.S. Department
of Justice, and the Pew Center on the States. The state leaders
agreed to establish a bipartisan, interbranch working group com-prised
of leading state officials which would receive intensive
technical assistance from the Council of State Governments Jus-tice
Center in partnership with the Pew Center on the States. The
CSG Justice Center will assist the working group in analyzing
data and developing a comprehensive set of policy options.
June 2011
Working Group
Speaker Kris Steele, Co-Chair
Oklahoma House of Representatives
Don Millican, Co-Chair
Chairman, Oklahoma Christian University
Board of Trustees
Senator Patrick Anderson
Oklahoma Senate
Trent Baggett
Assistant Executive Coordinator,
Oklahoma District Attorneys Council
Currie Ballard
Member, Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board
Representative Lisa Billy
Oklahoma House of Representatives
Allyson Carson
Victim Services Coordinator,
Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office
Secretary Terry Cline
Oklahoma Department of Health
Rebecca Frazier
Assistant General Counsel,
Oklahoma Office of the Governor
Director Howard Hendrick
Oklahoma Department of Human Services
Representative Scott Inman
Oklahoma House of Representatives
The Honorable Arlene Johnson
Presiding Judge, Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals
Director Justin Jones
Oklahoma Department of Corrections
Melissa McLawhorn Houston
Policy Director and Assistant Attorney General,
Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office
Ken McNair
Executive Director,
Oklahoma Sheriffs’ Association
Senator Jonathan Nichols
Oklahoma Senate
Senator Andrew Rice
Oklahoma Senate
Amy Santee
Senior Program Officer,
George Kaiser Family Foundation
Commissioner Terri White
Oklahoma Department of Mental Health
and Substance Abuse Services
2 Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma
Oklahoma’s violent crime rate is high; it has not decreased since 2000.
• In 2009, Oklahoma had the eleventh highest rate of violent crime in the U.S., with 501 reported crimes per
100,000 residents.1
• While Oklahoma’s violent crime rate increased slightly, by almost one percent, between 2000 and 2009, violent
crime rates nationally declined 15 percent; 36 states experienced a drop in their violent crime rates during this
time period.2
• Between 2000 and 2009, the property crime rate dropped 12 percent in Oklahoma, from 4,0613 to 3,5744 reported
crimes per 100,000 residents. Despite this decline, Oklahoma’s property crime rate remains above the national
average; it is the thirteenth highest in the nation.5
Oklahoma’s incarceration rate is one of the highest in the nation, particularly for women.
• Oklahoma’s incarceration rate remained relatively unchanged from 2000 to 2009. In 2009, the state���s incarcera-tion
rate—657 people incarcerated per 100,000 residents—was the third highest in the U.S.6
• In 2009, Oklahoma incarcerated 132 women per 100,000, which is nearly double the national average of 68 per
100,000. This incarceration rate for women is the highest among the 50 states and 43 percent higher than Texas,
which ranked number two at 92 women per 100,000 incarcerated.7
• Oklahoma incarcerated 2,760 females during FY 2010, an increase of 21 percent over the 2,289 females incar-cerated
in FY 2000.8
The state prison population increased significantly, along with state spending on
corrections, between FY 2000 and FY 2010.
• From FY 2000 to FY 2010, the state’s prison population grew 15 percent, from 22,621 to 25,935. If the people
sentenced to state prison but held in local jails are included in that calculation, the population increased 17
percent, from 23,258 to 27,283.9
• During the same period, the annual appropriation for the Oklahoma Department of Corrections increased 41
percent, from $356 million in FY 2000 to $503 million in FY 2010.10
• Utilization of jail bed backups increased 41 percent from 637 to 1,348 beds.11
Oklahoma policymakers do not currently receive a data-driven projection that forecasts the
growth of the state’s prison population.
• Prison population projections are based on trends in prison admissions, releases, and lengths of prison stay, in
addition to trends in other parts of the criminal justice system. In 2007, two-thirds of states used an advanced sim-ulation
projection methodology for this purpose.12 Currently, however, Oklahoma has no official state projection
to forecast future growth in the prison population or to estimate the impact of recent corrections policy changes.
• Assuming that the prison population continues to grow, policymakers currently do not have information to
guide decisions about how much to appropriate for additional prison space.
A majority of people released each year from prison are not supervised.
• After release from prison, a person can be released to probation (due to a split sentence), parole or without any
supervision because they have finished serving their sentence.
• Of those released from prison in FY 2010, 51 percent were released without any supervision, nine percent were
released to parole and 40 percent were released to probation.13
Criminal Justice Trends in Oklahoma
Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma 3
The Justice Reinvestment Approach
The CSG Justice Center will comprehensively analyze Oklahoma’s crime, arrest, conviction,
jail, prison, behavioral health and probation and parole supervision data. This analysis will
include a system-wide examination of the prison population, drivers of prison growth, and
strategies used currently by policymakers to increase public safety.
The CSG Justice Center will assist the Justice Reinvestment Working Group in review-ing
analyses and developing data-driven policy options that increase public safety and reduce
spending on corrections.
In collaboration with the Justice Reinvestment Working Group, which will review analysis
and share recommendations, the CSG Justice Center will develop data-driven policy options
that increase public safety and reduce spending on corrections.
step
1 Analyze data and
develop policy options
Once the policy options have been enacted, Oklahoma policymakers will need to verify that
the policies are adopted effectively. Policymakers may request continued assistance from the
Bureau of Justice Assistance to help translate the new policies into practice and ensure that
related programs and system investments achieve projected outcomes.
step
2 Adopt new policies and
put reinvestment strategies into place
Finally, the CSG Justice Center will ensure that Oklahoma officials receive brief, user-friendly,
and up-to-date information that explains the impact of enacted policies on jail and prison popu-lations,
and on rates of reincarceration and criminal activity. Typically, this includes a “dash-board”
of multiple indicators that make it easy for policymakers to track—in real time—the
changes in various components of the criminal justice system.
step
3 Measure Performance
4 Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma
To learn more about the justice reinvestment strategy
in Oklahoma and other states, please visit:
justicereinvestment.org
Points of view, recommendations, or findings stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
the official position or policies of The Pew Charitable Trusts, Council of State Governments Justice Center, or the Council of State
Governments’ members.
Suggested citation: Council of State Governments Justice Center, Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma: Overview (New York: Council of
State Governments Justice Center, 2011).
This project was supported by Grant No. 2010-
RRBX-K071 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the
Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the
Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of
Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Points
of view or opinions in this document are those of the
author and do not represent the official position or
policies of the United States Department of Justice.
To learn more about the Bureau of Justice Assistance,
please visit: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/.
Research and analysis described in this report has
been funded in part by the Public Safety Performance
Project of The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Center on the
States. Launched in 2006 as a project of the Pew Center
on the States, the Public Safety Performance Project
seeks to help states advance fiscally sound, data-driven
policies and practices in sentencing and corrections that
protect public safety, hold offenders accountable, and
control corrections costs.
To learn more about the Public Safety Performance
Project, please visit: http://www.pewpublicsafety.org/.
Bureau of Justice Assistance
U.S. Department of Justice
Council of State Governments Justice Center
justicecenter.csg.org
project contact:
Anne Bettesworth, Policy Analyst
206-420-2714 • abettesworth@csg.org
The Council of State Governments Justice Center is a national nonprofit organization that serves policymakers at the local, state,
and federal levels from all branches of government. The Justice Center provides practical, nonpartisan advice and consensus-driven
strategies, informed by available evidence, to increase public safety and strengthen communities.
1. United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(September 2010). Crime in the United States, 2009. Retrieved (May 1,
2011), from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/09cius.htm.
2. Ibid and United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation. (September 2001). Crime in the United States, 2000.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011), from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/
crime-in-the-u.s/2000/toc00.pdf.
3. United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation. (September 2001). Crime in the United States, 2000.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011), from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/
crime-in-the-u.s/2000/toc00.pdf.
4. United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation. (September 2010). Crime in the United States, 2009.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011), from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/09cius.htm.
5.Ibid.
6. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners
in State and Federal Institutions. (December 21, 2010). Prisoners in
2009. Retrieved (May 25, 2011), from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2232
7. US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2010).
Prisoners in 2009, Bulletin NCJ 231675. Retrieved (March 15, 2011)
from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2232.
8. Oklahoma Department of Corrections: Division of Female Offender
Operations. (2011). Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Report. Retrieved (June 7,
2011) from http://www.doc.state.ok.us/field/female/Fiscal%20Year%
202010%20Annual%20Report%20Final.pdf.
9. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, Evaluation and Analysis.
(2011). The State of Corrections in Oklahoma: Fiscal Year, 2010.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011) from http://www.doc.state.ok.us/
newsroom/annuals/2010/annualreport2010.pdf.
10. Oklahoma Department of Corrections. Legislative Budget Briefing,
January 2011.
11. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, Evaluation and Analysis.
(2011). The State of Corrections in Oklahoma: Fiscal Year, 2010.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011) from http://www.doc.state.ok.us/
newsroom/annuals/2010/annualreport2010.pdf.
12. Pew Center on the States, Public Safety Performance Project.
(Revised June 2007). Public Safety, Public Spending: Forecasting
America’s Prison Population 2007-2011. Retrieved (June 13, 2011)
from http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Public
%20Safety%20Public%20Spending.pdf.
13. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, Evaluation and Analysis.
(2011). The State of Corrections in Oklahoma: Fiscal Year, 2010.
Retrieved (May 1, 2011) from http://www.doc.state.ok.us/
newsroom/annuals/2010/annualreport2010.pdf.